Feb 19, 2009

News

Send

Reports disputed, member states divided

French government sticks to ban on cultivating MON810 GM maize

Representatives of the EU member states were unable to agree on Monday on the future of the MON810 bans currently in force in France and Greece. Meanwhile, the French government is sticking to its ban on cultivation, despite a report from the French national food safety authority (Afssa) that assesses MON810 as harmless to humans and animals.

MON810 Bt maize: According to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), France’s ban on cultivation has no scientific justification.

On Monday the members of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health were asked to vote on a decision document submitted by the European Commission. In it, the Commission had proposed lifting the bans imposed by France and Greece on the genetically modified (GM) maize line MON810, the only GM crop in commercial use in Europe. All EU member states are represented on the standing committee. The representatives of nine countries voted in favour of lifting the bans, while the representatives of 16 countries either voted against or abstained. Germany and Malta did not take part at all. This meant that there was no qualified majority for or against the Commission’s proposal and it will now be referred to the Council of Ministers for a vote.

New report – kept under wraps or released on purpose?

A few days before the expert committee met in Brussels, the French newspaper Le Figaro reported on an as yet unpublished report by the French food safety authority (Afssa). In the report, Afssa concludes that MON810 maize does not pose any health risks. The editors of Le Figaro speculated whether the report from the food safety authority, which was completed in October, was to have been kept under wraps until the meeting of the EU committee so as not to undermine the French position.

The newspaper article triggered a large number of reactions in France from supporters and opponents of the ban. The government issued a press release pointing out that the grounds for the ban were primarily environmental rather than health risks, so the report bore little relevance to the case in hand. Prime Minister François Fillon, Environment Minister Jean-Louis Borloo and Junior Environment Minister Chantal Jouanno made similar statements to the press. Environmental organisations believe the leaking of the Afssa report shortly before the vote in Brussels was an unsubtle attempt at manipulation by pro-biotech lobbyists. Associations of seed manufacturers, oilseed processors, maize producers and the pesticide industry were disappointed that the government was choosing to stick to its ban and called for a ‘return to reason’. Their spokesman, Philippe Gracien, declared that there was no scientific justification for banning GM plants authorised in the EU.

Focus on health and environmental risks

While the French government is drawing attention to the fact that the ban was based on ecological arguments, health arguments certainly formed part of the justification submitted to the EU. The health arguments also prompted the French health department to task Afssa with the expert report in question. The Afssa experts were to assess new health concerns raised by Professor Yvon Le Maho in a report on MON810. France had forwarded Le Maho’s statement to EFSA and the European Commission in June 2008 as part of the scientific justification for the MON810 ban. In his paper, Le Maho had stated, among other things, that there had not been sufficient research into the possible long-term toxic effects of the Bt protein and into whether it might cause cancer or prion diseases like BSE. The Afssa experts rejected these speculations in their report as they had already done in an earlier opinion statement. Similarly, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) found in October 2008 that the health concerns and the accusation that MON810 maize might pose environmental risks were unfounded. EFSA’s GMO Panel declared that France had not presented any new scientific data that could justify the ban.

Battle of the expert reports

This makes the Afssa report just the latest in a long line of opinion statements, reports and counter reports for and against the ban that have been produced in France over recent months. The Le Maho paper, on which the Afssa report is based, was in fact a response to the opinion statement by the seed manufacturer Monsanto in response to a report by France’s provisional High Council for Biotechnology, on the basis of which the French government had imposed the ban on the company’s maize. The report by Professor Le Maho was criticised in the French press. Alongside doubts about the scientific quality of the report, the criticism focused on the fact that no other experts had been involved in producing the report apart from the author himself.

The French maize producer association AGPM, together with Monsanto and other seed producers, also attempted to have the ban declared null and void in court. However, their attempts failed before the highest French administrative court in March 2008.

An end to the battle over the cultivation of GM plants in France and in the EU is therefore nowhere in sight. At European level, the next step will be a Council of Ministers vote on the French and Greek bans. If the ministers fail to come to an agreement, the European Commission will decide. The European bodies will also have to deal with Austrian and Hungarian bans over the coming weeks.